Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.—Heard Md. Harun Quareshi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Senior Counsel for the Nalanda University (hereinafter for the sake brevity ‘University’) and Mrs. Kanak Verma, learned Central Government Counsel.

2. By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, primarily the petitioner has challenged the termination of his employment by the University issued vide impugned office order dated 18.02.2019 (No. NU/108/2014- 15/83) and for other ancillary reliefs.

3. The brief fact emanates from the case record is that on 19.12.2013, a job advertisement was issued inviting applications for various positions at University, including for Tenure Track positions as Assistant Professor. At that time, the petitioner was working as a Research Fellow in the Department of History, National University of Singapore, in Singapore. The petitioner holds two Ph.D. degrees, one from the Institute of History, Leiden University from Netherlands and another from the Center for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. The petitioner possesses considerable teaching experience and received several prizes and scholarship.

4. Responding to the advertisement as aforesaid, the petitioner applied for a Tenure-Track position on 03.01.2014. He was invited for an interview over Skype from the University’s New Delhi office and his interview was conducted on 10.06.2014 by the Selection Committee of the University. After successful outcome of the application and interview, the same was communicated to the petitioner in the form of an offer letter dated 23.06.2014, by which the petitioner was invited to join the University as part of its founding faculty on very attractive terms. In the said offer letter, it was stipulated that this would be a Tenure Track position, and based upon the attractive terms, and the assurance of a Tenure Track, leading to the Tenured (permanent) position in third year after review, the petitioner accepted the position and took the opportunity to contribute to the re-establishment of the famous historical University, which was then under the Chancellorship of Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen.

5. Upon the request of the Head of the Department at National University, Singapore (hereinafter in short as ‘NUS’) to the University, the petitioner continued to be in employment at the NUS till the end of December, 2014 and on 01.01.2015, the petitioner joined the University at the School of Historical Studies in the position of Tenure Track Assistant and relocated to Rajgir, Bihar from Singapore along with his wife and then two years old daughter. As the petitioner was relocating from Singapore with his family, his wife sought employment in the same University. She appeared for a written examination and interview and also got a job as a Laboratory Assistant at the School of Ecology and Environment Studies in the year 2016.

6. The petitioner commenced teaching MA students at the University where he designed the syllabus of three substantial seminar course. In addition, the petitioner also crafted and taught four weekly modules in the ongoing MA courses. The petitioner further supervised seven MA Theses during his tenure on various themes, apart from the teaching responsibilities undertaken by the petitioner. The petitioner devoted himself wholeheartedly to the growth of this new institution and was found to be a highly popular teacher in the student reviews.

7. Although the petitioner had been assured, in terms of his Faculty Employment Contract, that there would be a Tenure Review during the academic year 2017-18 but this did not happen. On 17.11.2017, the petitioner was simply informed by the Officiating Registrar of the University that his Tenure Track position is extended for a further year i.e. from 01.01.2018 to 31.12.2018, on the existing terms and conditions. The petitioner was assured by the authorities of the University that the Tenure Review would t